Read Time: 09 minutes

The Single Bench of Justice R.Subramanian of Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, while declaring the marriage as null & void, has recently observed that misrepresentation regarding religion is a material fact that affects the validity of marriage.

“Once the plea of mistake is raised, it is for the party pleading mistake to prove the same. The documentary evidence that is made available would clearly point out the fact that there was a misrepresentation with reference to the material fact namely, the religion of the respondent at the time of marriage.”, the Bench noted.

In the present matter, the appellant filed a petition seeking a decree of nullity of marriage on the ground that his consent was obtained by practicing fraud & suppressing the fact that the respondent & her family were Christians and thereby misrepresented their religion, claiming themselves to be Hindu. The appellant’s petition was dismissed by the Additional Subordinate Judge vide order dated 10.11.2006 because the appellant could not establish his claim of respondent misrepresenting her religion at the time of marriage beyond a reasonable doubt; thus, he was not entitled to a decree of nullity. The appellant further filed an appeal before the District Judge, which was dismissed vide order dated 25.07.2008 on the ground that the appellant could not prove that the respondent or her family violated section 5 & section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (“Act”) to entitle him to get a decree for nullity of marriage. After that, the appellant filed a second appeal u/s 28(1) of the Act r/w section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 against the order dated 10.11.2006 & order dated 25.07.2008 seeking for declaration of marriage as null & void.

On the other hand, the respondent contended that the entries in the school record concerning her religion as Christain were made by mistake as the respondent’s father did not accompany her for school admission. Further, the respondent submitted that the marriage was conducted as a Hindu Marriage in a Temple & therefore appellant’s claim that the respondent was not a Hindu was false.

The issues that arose for consideration were:

(i) Whether the courts below were right in accepting the plea of mistake, raised by the respondent, regarding her religious identity?

(ii) Whether the fact that the respondent is a born Christian, would be sufficient to declare the marriage as a nullity for violation of conditions under Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act?

Further with regards to the Respondent relying on the Community Certificate issued to her certifying that she is a Hindu the Bench observed that, “As regards the other documents also, those documents have been produced as the certificates issued by the associations of persons which have no legal sanctity. While the marriage can be performed in a Temple and marriage certificate can be issued by a Temple, the Temple authority or any other authority cannot issue a certificate evidencing the marriage that had taken place elsewhere.”

By considering the plethora of documentary evidence available to support the appellant’s claim that the respondent was a Christian by birth and she was practicing Christianity throughout her life, the Court observed that the respondent could not establish the plea of mistake raised by her. Further, the Court also noted that the Courts below were not right in placing the burden of proving misrepresentation on the appellant & concluding that the appellant failed to discharge the same.

To answer the second issue, the Court further remarked that,

“Courts below had not appreciated the evidence, which is available on record. They had chosen to ignore very crucial documentary evidence which had resulted in their findings being against the documentary evidence that is available on record. I am constrained to point out that the lower appellate court had not adverted to the fact that the various documents, particularly the official documents which are maintained by people, who are statutorily obliged to maintain such documents disclose that the respondent is a Christian. It had chosen to rely upon documents that emanated after the filing of the original petition. The claim of mistake has been left unsubstantiated.”

Thus, the Bench while allowing the appellant’s appeal, setting aside the orders of the lower court & considering the ex parte decree granting divorce as invalid   declared the marriage as null and void. 

Case Title: P Sivakumar v. S Beula

Law Point/Statute Involved: Section 5, section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act

Access Copy of Judgment Here